popeyeball

Tax problem?
I thought that was ridiculous also until I heard how they were going to
track this. At first I though they would check the odomoter each year
when buying plates or when car was sold but no way.
Now I hear they want to install GPS in each car so they know where we
all are at each moment. Tracking our cell phones isn't enough I guess
(been watching to much '24') lol. Plus, they want to charge additional
cost during rush hour to discourage people from driving certain hours.
They won't give us a break till we go broke.
Steve
DougW wrote:
> Just heard this unbelievable load of horsepucky
> on the TV. Places like the PRK (Peoples Republic
> of Kalifornia) are mulling a tax-by-the-mile rather
> than tax on the gallon of fuel. Why? Because folks
> are buying econo boxes to save money and lower pollution
> so the state isn't getting their fair share of the loot.
>
> They also mentioned increased mile taxes for peak rush hours.
> Just what every worker that's trying to make it in a tough
> economy needs.
>
> Now isn't that a kick in the butt. What they won't
> do to get more taxes out of people.
>
> They do that I'm going back to my bicycle. :)
>
> (yea, they will probably find a way to tax that too)
>
> And when they do I'm moving to Mexico.
>
> --
> DougW

popeyeball

Tax problem?
I thought that was ridiculous also until I heard how they were going to
track this. At first I though they would check the odomoter each year
when buying plates or when car was sold but no way.
Now I hear they want to install GPS in each car so they know where we
all are at each moment. Tracking our cell phones isn't enough I guess
(been watching to much '24') lol. Plus, they want to charge additional
cost during rush hour to discourage people from driving certain hours.
They won't give us a break till we go broke.
Steve
DougW wrote:
> Just heard this unbelievable load of horsepucky
> on the TV. Places like the PRK (Peoples Republic
> of Kalifornia) are mulling a tax-by-the-mile rather
> than tax on the gallon of fuel. Why? Because folks
> are buying econo boxes to save money and lower pollution
> so the state isn't getting their fair share of the loot.
>
> They also mentioned increased mile taxes for peak rush hours.
> Just what every worker that's trying to make it in a tough
> economy needs.
>
> Now isn't that a kick in the butt. What they won't
> do to get more taxes out of people.
>
> They do that I'm going back to my bicycle. :)
>
> (yea, they will probably find a way to tax that too)
>
> And when they do I'm moving to Mexico.
>
> --
> DougW

Retiredff

DougW wrote:
> Just heard this unbelievable load of horsepucky
> on the TV. Places like the PRK (Peoples Republic
> of Kalifornia) are mulling a tax-by-the-mile rather
> than tax on the gallon of fuel.

Whether it happens or nor remains to be seen, but it seems like the idea
will probably ------ like wildfire. I heard Oregon was entertaining the
thought.

Retiredff

DougW wrote:
> Just heard this unbelievable load of horsepucky
> on the TV. Places like the PRK (Peoples Republic
> of Kalifornia) are mulling a tax-by-the-mile rather
> than tax on the gallon of fuel.

Whether it happens or nor remains to be seen, but it seems like the idea
will probably ------ like wildfire. I heard Oregon was entertaining the
thought.

Retiredff

DougW wrote:
> Just heard this unbelievable load of horsepucky
> on the TV. Places like the PRK (Peoples Republic
> of Kalifornia) are mulling a tax-by-the-mile rather
> than tax on the gallon of fuel.

Whether it happens or nor remains to be seen, but it seems like the idea
will probably ------ like wildfire. I heard Oregon was entertaining the
thought.

Lee Ayrton

I fully recognize that this has fark-all to do with Jeeps, but since you
opened this little can of rancid worms I've got some thoughts -- not
argument points, just things to consider:

1) Highway maintenance costs are relatively fixed and are not directly
related to fuel consumption. Cracks must be sealed, road kill removed and
bridges painted whether there's 100 vehicles/day or 100,000 vehicles/day.

2) Someone's got to pay for it. Is it fairer to shift the cost to those
who use the roads the most, those whose vehicles cause the most wear, or
to all who benefit from the road (including non-driving pensioners whowse
food and medicine comes over the roads) or to ------ the cost in some
other way? You obviously don't want to pay for it, why should anyone else
want to?

3) Other states (New York, for one) is considering _selling_ some highways
to private companies. These companies will fund their costs -- and their
corporate profits -- by establishing tolls on the roads. Historically,
such enterprises fail miserably both in terms of economic success and in
terms of highway maintanence and the State always ends up buying the road
back -- at a huge cost to the taxpayer.

4) California is a representative democracy. If you don't like a proposed
law complain loudly -- and get lots of other people to complain loudly
with you. If that doesn't yield the results you wanted, work to vote the
buggers out in the next election. If you don't, you've no right to
whinge about the result.

Oh, and a hint on winning friends and influencing politicians: Making
references to nazism (spelling California with a "K") or totalitarian
communism (the People's blah blah blah) might seem cute and lets you vent
some anger, but it makes you look like a raving crackpot to _them_ and
will just alienate the very people you want to influence. Don't do it
where they will see it.


On Mon, 14 Feb 2005, DougW wrote:

> Just heard this unbelievable load of horsepucky
> on the TV. Places like the PRK (Peoples Republic
> of Kalifornia) are mulling a tax-by-the-mile rather
> than tax on the gallon of fuel. Why? Because folks
> are buying econo boxes to save money and lower pollution
> so the state isn't getting their fair share of the loot.
>
> They also mentioned increased mile taxes for peak rush hours.
> Just what every worker that's trying to make it in a tough
> economy needs.
>
> Now isn't that a kick in the butt. What they won't
> do to get more taxes out of people.
>
> They do that I'm going back to my bicycle. :)
>
> (yea, they will probably find a way to tax that too)
>
> And when they do I'm moving to Mexico.
>
> --
> DougW
>
>
>

--
"I defer to your plainly more vivid memories of topless women with
whips....r"
R. H. Draney recalls AFU in the Good Old Days.

Lee Ayrton

I fully recognize that this has fark-all to do with Jeeps, but since you
opened this little can of rancid worms I've got some thoughts -- not
argument points, just things to consider:

1) Highway maintenance costs are relatively fixed and are not directly
related to fuel consumption. Cracks must be sealed, road kill removed and
bridges painted whether there's 100 vehicles/day or 100,000 vehicles/day.

2) Someone's got to pay for it. Is it fairer to shift the cost to those
who use the roads the most, those whose vehicles cause the most wear, or
to all who benefit from the road (including non-driving pensioners whowse
food and medicine comes over the roads) or to ------ the cost in some
other way? You obviously don't want to pay for it, why should anyone else
want to?

3) Other states (New York, for one) is considering _selling_ some highways
to private companies. These companies will fund their costs -- and their
corporate profits -- by establishing tolls on the roads. Historically,
such enterprises fail miserably both in terms of economic success and in
terms of highway maintanence and the State always ends up buying the road
back -- at a huge cost to the taxpayer.

4) California is a representative democracy. If you don't like a proposed
law complain loudly -- and get lots of other people to complain loudly
with you. If that doesn't yield the results you wanted, work to vote the
buggers out in the next election. If you don't, you've no right to
whinge about the result.

Oh, and a hint on winning friends and influencing politicians: Making
references to nazism (spelling California with a "K") or totalitarian
communism (the People's blah blah blah) might seem cute and lets you vent
some anger, but it makes you look like a raving crackpot to _them_ and
will just alienate the very people you want to influence. Don't do it
where they will see it.


On Mon, 14 Feb 2005, DougW wrote:

> Just heard this unbelievable load of horsepucky
> on the TV. Places like the PRK (Peoples Republic
> of Kalifornia) are mulling a tax-by-the-mile rather
> than tax on the gallon of fuel. Why? Because folks
> are buying econo boxes to save money and lower pollution
> so the state isn't getting their fair share of the loot.
>
> They also mentioned increased mile taxes for peak rush hours.
> Just what every worker that's trying to make it in a tough
> economy needs.
>
> Now isn't that a kick in the butt. What they won't
> do to get more taxes out of people.
>
> They do that I'm going back to my bicycle. :)
>
> (yea, they will probably find a way to tax that too)
>
> And when they do I'm moving to Mexico.
>
> --
> DougW
>
>
>

--
"I defer to your plainly more vivid memories of topless women with
whips....r"
R. H. Draney recalls AFU in the Good Old Days.

Lee Ayrton

I fully recognize that this has fark-all to do with Jeeps, but since you
opened this little can of rancid worms I've got some thoughts -- not
argument points, just things to consider:

1) Highway maintenance costs are relatively fixed and are not directly
related to fuel consumption. Cracks must be sealed, road kill removed and
bridges painted whether there's 100 vehicles/day or 100,000 vehicles/day.

2) Someone's got to pay for it. Is it fairer to shift the cost to those
who use the roads the most, those whose vehicles cause the most wear, or
to all who benefit from the road (including non-driving pensioners whowse
food and medicine comes over the roads) or to ------ the cost in some
other way? You obviously don't want to pay for it, why should anyone else
want to?

3) Other states (New York, for one) is considering _selling_ some highways
to private companies. These companies will fund their costs -- and their
corporate profits -- by establishing tolls on the roads. Historically,
such enterprises fail miserably both in terms of economic success and in
terms of highway maintanence and the State always ends up buying the road
back -- at a huge cost to the taxpayer.

4) California is a representative democracy. If you don't like a proposed
law complain loudly -- and get lots of other people to complain loudly
with you. If that doesn't yield the results you wanted, work to vote the
buggers out in the next election. If you don't, you've no right to
whinge about the result.

Oh, and a hint on winning friends and influencing politicians: Making
references to nazism (spelling California with a "K") or totalitarian
communism (the People's blah blah blah) might seem cute and lets you vent
some anger, but it makes you look like a raving crackpot to _them_ and
will just alienate the very people you want to influence. Don't do it
where they will see it.


On Mon, 14 Feb 2005, DougW wrote:

> Just heard this unbelievable load of horsepucky
> on the TV. Places like the PRK (Peoples Republic
> of Kalifornia) are mulling a tax-by-the-mile rather
> than tax on the gallon of fuel. Why? Because folks
> are buying econo boxes to save money and lower pollution
> so the state isn't getting their fair share of the loot.
>
> They also mentioned increased mile taxes for peak rush hours.
> Just what every worker that's trying to make it in a tough
> economy needs.
>
> Now isn't that a kick in the butt. What they won't
> do to get more taxes out of people.
>
> They do that I'm going back to my bicycle. :)
>
> (yea, they will probably find a way to tax that too)
>
> And when they do I'm moving to Mexico.
>
> --
> DougW
>
>
>

--
"I defer to your plainly more vivid memories of topless women with
whips....r"
R. H. Draney recalls AFU in the Good Old Days.

Derrick Hudson

On Tue, 15 Feb 2005 12:19:39 -0500, Lee Ayrton wrote:

> 3) Other states (New York, for one) is considering _selling_ some highways
> to private companies.

Do you have any references to this? As a NYS resident I am quite
interested to know more.

> These companies will fund their costs -- and their
> corporate profits -- by establishing tolls on the roads. Historically,
> such enterprises fail miserably both in terms of economic success and in
> terms of highway maintanence and the State always ends up buying the road
> back -- at a huge cost to the taxpayer.

In fourth grade I learned some of the history of the Town of Greece.
One of the main roads through the town, W. Ridge Road, used to be an
Indian path and was supposedly formed when the glaciers stopped moving
south right after carving out the Great Lakes. At one time there were
some toll booths along the road. Instead of paying the tolls, the
local farmers allowed the other farmers to travel through their
fields, around the toll booth. That is how Stone Road and some other
road (I don't remember the name now) were formed and why they have the
odd direction they have.

-D

--
"...In the UNIX world, people tend to interpret `non-technical user' as
meaning someone who's only ever written one device driver."
--Daniel Pead

www: http://dman13.dyndns.org/~dman/ jabber: dman@dman13.dyndns.org

Derrick Hudson

On Tue, 15 Feb 2005 12:19:39 -0500, Lee Ayrton wrote:

> 3) Other states (New York, for one) is considering _selling_ some highways
> to private companies.

Do you have any references to this? As a NYS resident I am quite
interested to know more.

> These companies will fund their costs -- and their
> corporate profits -- by establishing tolls on the roads. Historically,
> such enterprises fail miserably both in terms of economic success and in
> terms of highway maintanence and the State always ends up buying the road
> back -- at a huge cost to the taxpayer.

In fourth grade I learned some of the history of the Town of Greece.
One of the main roads through the town, W. Ridge Road, used to be an
Indian path and was supposedly formed when the glaciers stopped moving
south right after carving out the Great Lakes. At one time there were
some toll booths along the road. Instead of paying the tolls, the
local farmers allowed the other farmers to travel through their
fields, around the toll booth. That is how Stone Road and some other
road (I don't remember the name now) were formed and why they have the
odd direction they have.

-D

--
"...In the UNIX world, people tend to interpret `non-technical user' as
meaning someone who's only ever written one device driver."
--Daniel Pead

www: http://dman13.dyndns.org/~dman/ jabber: dman@dman13.dyndns.org